Evaluating the contribution of citizen science labs to food system transformation: tensions, mutual learning and success factors in participatory development of an impact evaluation framework

Introduction
Food system transformations are complex, influenced by cultural, environmental, and socio-economic factors, involving multiple actors with diverse priorities (Downs et al., 2020). Citizen science offers a bottom-up approach in shaping food system transformation. However, its potential remains not fully recognized, as established evaluation approaches are based on the pre-defined impact pathways and are focused on measurable results but to a lesser extent consider process-related, systemic and emergent impacts (Fanzo et al., 2021). Alternative evaluation approaches remain largely uninstitutionalized, undertheorized, and may burden participants and project coordinators. This paper presentes a comprehensive impact evaluation approach for a R&I project on food system transformation through citizen science labs (CSLs), integrating top-down and bottom-up perspectives in a multi-layered framework. By embracing tensions between evaluation paradigms, we ensure feasibility, epistemic justice, and context-responsive impact while examining factors enabling or constraining participatory impact evaluation frameworks.
Research question: What are the distinct conditions arising from the contexts of citizen science and food system transformation, that should be considered in the design of comprehensive project impact evaluation frameworks?
Theory
The framework intertwines the theoretical underpinning of intervention logic and impact pathways, with citizen science and formative evaluation approaches (Kieslinger et al., 2018; Otieno et al., 2023, Pateman & West, 2023). We use the concepts of food environments, local participation cultures and food cultures to illustrate the implications of using universalist evaluation approaches in the context of local food systems (Edmondson et al., 2019). Applying the concept of epistemic justice, we investigate how different knowledge systems contribute to the evaluation process and how the benefits of the generated knowledge match the actual needs and capacities of the participants.
Methods
The framework is designed through integrating different kinds of knowledge in the co-creative process, including critical literature review, as well as co-creation and validation workshops with CSLs to ensure the integration of top-down strategic priorities and project impact pathways with local priories and needs. Building on the shared framework, behavioral change interventions (BCIs) will collaboratively be designed and monitored by an Impact Board of CSL coordinators and key
370
stakeholders to evaluate and improve implementation. Additionally, these interventions undergo continuous refinement through formative evaluation.
Findings
Based on experience from a project focusing on food system transformations utilising the potential of citizens science and data sharing, we outline the experience of developing the framework through a participatory process design and reflect on the tensions that may arise, mutual learning and factors that influence success in devising a comprehensive and context-responsive impact evaluation framework. The framework represents a case of bringing together different food system transformation aspects and taking up the distinct potential of participatory research and citizen science labs within an evaluation framework.
Implications
The framework supports context-responsive conceptualisation of impact pathways, by outlining ways to integrate top-down and bottom-up elements of impact creation within the project design. The paper also contributes to the literature on transdisciplinary knowledge co-production, by outlining mechanisms for integrating different perspectives and proactively addressing tensions that arise in the process.